houses and the need to fund essential missions and perform. i'm worried abthe lowered funding that would mean -- what the lowered funding would mean not only for read iiness today but also the significant cuts sladed for accusations. i look forward to discussing this with the admiral today. noaa also plays a vital role for our nation and i welcome dr. sullivan to today's hearing. noaa's accurate observations and forecasts are essential to the nation's weather-dependent industries like agriculture, aviation and shipping and in my state, fishing. for these sectors, it means more than just planning a picnic, indeed, lives dependent on their accuracy. i commend noaa for its responses to the severe weather our nation has experienced.

the accurate forecast of the course of hurricane sandy gave advanced warning and saved lives and property. in the wake of the storm, noaa's vessels went to work to ensure the shipping channels affected by the storm remained clear and open to bring needed supplies and restore commerce along the sthrantic seaboard. our nation's fishermen are also - also depend on them. 'd also like to brag, as producer of over half the nation's seafood, this is also upon the alaskan native people depend on as a traditional source of nourishment. i'm pleased that the administration has a modest increase in noaa's fiscal 2014

budget. for ocean observation, fish dock assessments and basic research in climate and debris. i share concerns about the programs which are being cut to afford these, and the impact on furloughs of noaa's personnel. i look forward to today's discussion with dr. sullivan. before we turn to the witness, let me ask my ranking member, senator rubio, to make his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank our witnesses here at the subcommittee today and i want to thank you, admiral, for being here. last year the coast guard responded to over 20,000 search and rescue and is a role in so many roles. i want to say we very much appreciate your service to our country and i want to thank the chairman for holding this hearing today. i think as we know, we live in a time of record deficits and maintaining the right policies is important more than ever.

i appreciate the opportunity to hear what the administration's priorities are for the upcoming fiscal year for both the coast guard and for noaa, and specifically i'm interested in hearing from the coast guard about the status of the recapitalization efforts. this program is vital to our national security, so i was disappointed when to see in the latest budget proposal that the effort is being scaled back and we will have a few questions on that topic. additionally, i understand the president's budget proposal shifts our navy assets in the western hemisphere to the pacific. as a ranking member on the east asian and pacific subcommittee, i recognize are the importance of and support a strong u.s. presence in that region. however, i'm going to have several questions about the reduction of our presence in the western hemisphere and the implications on this reduction on the counterillicit trafficking mission. as for the noaa budget, i long called for an increased in improved -- and improved data collection to support fisheries. i'm encouraged of the increased expanding stock

assessments in the president's budget. however, i'm disappointed to see the continued diversion of money from the kennedy grant program, and i'll have a few questions for dr. sullivan on this topic. additionally, noaa has proposed to list 66 species of coral under the endangered species act, several of which are found off the coast of florida. i'm concerned about the implication of this listing and how it will impact many of the vital industries in the state of florida, such as commercial and recreational fishing industries. i'm interested to hear how the agency will move forward with this listing. d the president listed his implementation plan and i'm concerned about the president of the implementation plan. too often this administration puts forth voluntary quote-unquote like the national ocean policy when all is said and done we're faced with a new regulatory regime with questionable value and severe economic consequences. last congress i requested an oversight hearing on this policy and i'm hopeful that the committee will renew its focus

on this initiative in the coming year. with that i want to thank you, mr. clarme, and for the witnesses being here today and i look forward to your testimony. >> thank you very much, senator rubio. let me go ahead and we'll start with admirable papp. we thank you very much for being here and it's a pleasure to see you and i know the folks in alaska when you come visit the station there always appreciate the visit from the folks in d.c. >> thank you, chairman begich. we'll be back. thank you. senator rubio, it's great to appear before you for the first time and this subcommittee. it's my honor to be here to talk about our coast guard and in particular the f.y. 2014 budget. i'd like to begin by thanking all of you for the tremendous support we received over the last year for the f.y. 2013 budget and also the emergency supplemental for hurricane sandy. it enables us to recapitalize our aging fleet, to sustain our front line operations and to care for our people. these were hard-earned gains

that i hope to sustain in spite of the uncertain and stormy seas caused by the current fiscal environment. yesterday in boston, the nation began to pay tribute and final respects to those killed in last week's senseless violence. the collective hearts of our coast guard family go out to the people of boston and all the families that have been harmed by this tragedy. but they also go out because the coast guard is a part of that community in boston, and we were able to respond immediately with boats and cruise and armed helicopter, vessel boarding teams and overall enhancement of maritime transportation security posture. our ability to respond like this, not only in boston, but in all our ports, is a direct result of the support that we've received from the congress and the administration over the last 12 years. the results of that support were also demonstrated during hurricane sandy when we rescued 14 crewmembers from the sailing ship h.m.s. bounty in 30-foot seas and 60 knot winds 80 miles offshore. we're also part of the

community in new york and new jersey, so we were pleased to be able to get the port running again after the storm and we worked across government and industry to reopen the port to the vital commerce that it provides. last year to meet the growing demands in the arctic, we mpleted operation arctic shield, a nine-month with two ice capable bowie tenders and two helicopters 300 miles above the arctic circle. given the lack of shore infrastructure the capabilities provided were critical. in executing the department of homeland security layered security strategy, the coast guard detected and interdicted threats as far from our shores as possible, targeting central america coastal trafficking routes, our cutters and aircraft teams with interagency aircraft to interdict drugs with a street value of $15 million of cocaine and we also disrupted transnational

criminal organizations. closer to shore, we responded to the growing threat of a small goal fast vessels that smugglers are using to avoid increased security along the southwest border. drug smuggling, human trafficking and other illicit maritime crimes are engaging and growing smarter, bolder and taking greater risks and increasing danger to our homeland. transnational criminal organizations in central america and mexico are financed by narcotics that arrive by way of the sea, leaving behind a wave of crime and instability in their wake. in december, we were reminded of the dangers of our duties as i presided at the memorial service of terrell horn iii of the coast guard hal butt. he died when he was rammed near san diego. our commitment to honor the duty of senior chief horn strengthens our resolve to defeat these threats. unfortunately, much like the weather and the seas that we encounter on a daily basis, the

coast guard cannot control the fiscal environment in which we operate. we will make the best use of the resources you provide to safely and effectively conduct operations in the areas of greatest risk to the nation while recapitalizing our cutters, boats and aircraft to address current and emerging threats, particularly in the offshore environment. this past year we made great strides in recapitalizing the coast guard's aging fleet. in october we'll kristen the hamilton. number five is under construction. we're about ready to award the contract on number six. we've taken delivery of five new response cutter parole boats, aircraft and contracted for the ninth hc-130-j and completed the midlife availability of our boats and midlife availability of our endurance cutters at the coast guard yard. despite these successes, we have a long way to go to recapitalize the coast guard with the ships, boats and aircraft the nation needs. the capital investment plan, which has been delivered

recently to congress, should help to inform the discussion on the years ahead. as the department of defense rebalances to the pacific, maritime activity increases in the arctic and our nation focuses only the southwest border. offshore demand for coast guard capabilities and authorities is increasing. our 378-high endurance cutters have ably served the offshore environment for 50 years, but as i've testified in the past, they are at the end of their service lives. so i'm very happy to report i received strong support from the secretary and the president of my absolute highest acquisition priorities, including the funding for the seventh national security cutter in the 2014 budget. the f.y. 2014 budget sustains the most critical front line foreign relations while -- with the -- and it has tough decisions to be informed by my highest priorities. these were difficult decisions for me and the service but they were the best ensuring we have the tools required to protect

our nation. while realistic and mindful of the current fiscal environment, i remain optimistic about the future of the coast guard. it's my duty to look beyond the annual budget cycle and to prepare and adapt the service to keep it moving to address the major maritime safety and risks to the nation now and to the future. the men and women of the coast guard give their all and make sacrifices every day putting their country first. we owe them our very best efforts to provide them the support they need. this subcommittee has long supported the then and women of the coast guard, recognizing their sacrifice and on behalf of all my coast guard shipmates, i want to thank you and i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much, commandant. let me move now to dr. sullivan. again, acting director for noaa. thank you very much for being here. >> thank you, gentlemen. ranking member rubio, members of the committee, i'm very pleased also to be here today to talk with you about the -- >> is your microphone on? >> now it's on.

my apologies. i'm pleased to be here to present the president's f.y. 2014 budget request for noaa to you today. this budget builds on a year of considerable achievement for noaa, made possible by the dedicated work of our program employees and the many partners who help us achieve our mission. the past year provided again evidence of the tremendous value that noaa delivers to the american public. thanks to the agency's unique mission of oceanic steward and the strong ability we have developed through our 40 year-long history to mobilize and fuse these diverse elements effectively, in response to both the issue of the moment and the challenges of our times. the value of this integrated one noaa approach was demonstrated vividly this past october as hurricane sandy bore down on the caribbean and the united states' east coast. noaa mobilized programs and efforts from across the agency to help americans prepare for, respond to and recover from this devastating storm. our people, products and

services made absolutely vital contributions to emergency managers and communities throughout the affected regions. from forecasting the storm's track and impacts which varied from upland snows and record storms days in advance, to reports after the storm's passage, to the delivery of critical supplies and the timely resumption of maritime commerce, to have recovery assistance sped to the scene. our f.y. 2014 budget proposal advanced noaa's ability to help people safeguard the lives of their citizens, prepare for extreme weather events, adapt to a changing world, ensure their environment is sustainable and enhance the economic prosperity of their communities. my written testimony provides more detailed information about our request. for now, i wish to emphasize three important preaccepts that underlie our proposed budget. first, focus on core missions and fiscal discipline within

our programs. second, make targeted investments in key areas that improve the balance among our diverse and vital programs. and third, continue to promote efficiencies in program operations. our focus on these preaccepts was reinforced by concerns expressed by the congress and many of our partners over the past year. we listened and we believe this budget lays out a path forward that addresses those concerns. the most notable example of our commitment to core missions and fiscal discipline lies in the changes we made to the joint polar satellite system. noaa, working closely with our partners at nasa. has sharpened our focus on weather missions including the climate record through 2021. we've identified more than $1 billion in life cycle cost savings. we've strengthened program management and we have decreased the possibility of a gap in data by moving the launch date of the second satellite forward to 2021. fisheries management, as you

point out, mr. chairman, is another core noaa mission. we proposed to increase our investments in fisheries science, in the stock assessments, surveys and monitoring needed to underpin successful management of these programs to ensure we have the information needed both to end over fishing and to realize the economic opportunities that restored stocks represent. with respect to achieving a better mission balance, this budget proposes a carefully chosen set of targeted investments that improve the balance between our oceanic and our atmospheric programs, our extra measurial and intrameasurial policies and the long-term and immediate benefits our nation receives. in the interest of time, i will highlight just two of the many points that are salient here. first is great importance of our partnersships in research, in data acquisition and conservation action. noaa could simply not accomplish its mission without the talents and compass its of our external partners. second, as the president has

stated on numerous occasions, we must not let immediate fiscal pressures call kilpatrick all of our investments in the future. this budget proposes targeted investments in hab fat restoration, basic research and other activities that sets the stage for long-term environmental sustainability, economic vitality and future noaa service enhancements. in some, this budget proposal makes important strides towards a healthier balance of advancements across domains and between needs -- the urgent needs of food and the important demands of tomorrow. finally, we remain committed to good government, to use faxpayer dollars that we are appropriated -- taxpayer dollars that we are appropriated both effectively and efficiently. we've made significant progress on this front in recent years by consolidating activities, streamlining programs, adopting more acquisition vehicles and carefully controlling discretionary expenditures. this budget continues those efforts and proposes additional efficiencies in corporate

services, in i.t. savings, consolidations and termination by tough decision of some lower priority programs. in closing, noaa is a science-based, intradisciplinary, integrated agency that provides essential environmental intelligence to citizens, communities and businesses. the work of noaa's people and partners touches the life of every american every single day. and this budget enables us to continue and improve this important work and service to our nation. i thank you, again, for the privilege of appearing before you today and look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much, dr. sullivan. what i'd like to do is i'll start with the ranking member, senator rubio, and we'll go through the list at that point. >> thank you, mr. chairman. admiral papp, my question, i alluded to you, it's about the shift to focus to the eastern pacific of which i think is important to do, but i'm worried about the impact it has the place we're shifting from. in particular, how will the

mission be impacted by the loss of the gray hull which has been heavily utilized in the south come area of responsibility and now being retired? the combat ship will be the replacement for the frig etc. but which don't see them -- frigettes but we don't see them until 2018. if you could comment on the impact it will have on operations in the western hemisphere and the caribbean in particular. >> senator, the western hemisphere has been a focus of mine since becoming commandant. the country is absolutely right in terms of this focus towards the pacific and towards asia. and the coast guard i think could provide contributions and we have in fact provided contributions there in the past. there are nations like china that are looking to the u.s. coast guard for as a role model for the type of base that they are building and i think we could serve great purpose out there. unfortunately, without the reduction of resources, my

highest resource is for the western hemisphere. the arctic and most notably in the caribbean and the eastern pacific where we have the drug trafficking routes. in years past, the navy has been a force multiplier for us. they work for joint interagency task force south and for the detection and monitoring mission and they carry coast guard law enforcement detachments so in fact we can change operational control to a coast guard commander when we detect a drug smuggler as use that as a coast guard cutter because we have our people embarked on the navy ships. the loss of the ships in the caribbean ultimately will result in more drugs in a are making it through. i know, talking to joint interagency task force south, because we have a good coast guard representation. in fact, its director is a coast guard admiral, right now we are only intercepting about 1/3 of the tracks we are aware of in people smuggling drugs towards central america. last year, we interdicted 107

metric tons. that's 107 metric tons of pure cocaine that didn't make it into south -- into central america to make its way across our borders. by comparison, all the law enforcement agencies in the 48 states only interdicted only 40 metric tons of cocaine. and that's after its broken down as well. so more drugs and we'll have fewer assets that we can redivert to other missions like migrant interdiction and other coast guard activities in those areas. >> so i mean, the gist of it, it's not that it's a bad idea, it's the fact that it's not being replaced by anything that creates these problems and at least until 2018 to be pretty significant? >> yes, sir. even the navy has held out that the combat ships will be out there, it will take a while for them to be out there. we don't know what the budget will portend for the navy in the outyears. so right now we're only capable of -- i'd be glad to give you a

classified briefing on the number of ships we provide down there on a basis, because of sequestration and the future affects of the fleet on the navy, we're well below the numbers of ships we need down there to interdict. >> dr. sullivan, i wanted to ask you about the stock kennedy grant program. what's the percent of this amount compared to -- i guess the budget includes $8.2 million. i guess the question i have, what's the percent of this amount compared to the total amount of the receipts your agency received from the u.s. department of agriculture under this program? my notes tell me you received $123 million of the budget was diverted elsewhere. the percentage that's being kept in this program is about 6.25%. is that accurate? >> senator, those figures correspond to the numbers that i have. e received some $132 million in transfer from the department of agriculture of which some

$8.2 million will be applied specifically to the salt grant activities and transferred to the noaa activities which i point out are very much the same activities that fishermen are clamoring for, monitoring and surveying. >> ok. the second thing -- because my time is going to run out -- i want to ask you about the 66 coral species endangered that are being put into this protective status. my understanding is that the budge asks for, if i'm not mistaken, it's about $1 million to implement it in the first year, is that correct, roughly? >> i don't have a budget figure for first-year implementation at my fingertips. >> we'll confirm on that. how much do we think it will cost over time? is this a program that we think will increase in cost as the years goes on, as the workload and as the industries get impacted by thristing?

i'm not saying the listing is a good or bad idea. i'm just focusing on the cost of it. the first-year costs, and if i'm mistaken we'll correct it, it's about $1 million in the first year. do you know what the estimates going forward in the future years and how that workload will grow? >> the outyear profile -- and i do not have an estimate for -- will depend on which stocks come through in a final listing decision. we're working very hard to get things right. this is a very significant decision. as you know we've extended the analysis period. we've extended the public comment period. we're in anticipation of a final ruling a year from now already reaching out to poe he tensionly affected communities and industries and work with them and get an assessment of what sorts of impacts might be. >> thank you very much. we'll do a second round. i know we'll have time. senator wicker is next on the list. senator wicker. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start with admiral papp and thank you both for your testimony and for your service.

over the last several years there's been a lot of discussion about the new national security cutters. now that the first three cutters are operation hahl, first of all, tell us -- operational, first of all, tell us how they're performing, paul to the vintage high endurance cutters which are being ? and then let me go ahead and ask why the president's budget only included funding for materials for the seventh national security cutter with no mention of funding for the ghth. when the coast guard in fact has said that eight are the minimum required to a place, the 12 -- replace the 12 endurance cutters. >> thank you very much, senator. it's good to see you again. the national security cutter is absolutely the best performing

coast guard cutter we've had in our history. it's heads above the sit that t high endurance cutter was a superb ship. it's just old. structurally unsound and environmentally unfriendly and just not up to taking on the missions that we do today. so national security cutter has been a vast improvement. really performing i think above and beyond what we asked of it. greatest example i have is that one of the national security cutters was operating up in the baring sea where we'll primarily employ these ships and in -- bering sea where we'll primarily employ these ships and we were able to conduct boat drills. that's the major capability we need. we need to be able to put boats in the water to do boarding and get helicopters out to do rescue and surveillance. it has an engineering plant that will drive it at higher speeds, at greater fuel efficiency and give us a range of combinations of engines and

ropulsion that allow us to sprint. it has greater sensor capability. it has a skiff where we can do intelligence work. prly one of the things that's nearest art, nd dea finaa ip t young patriots that step forward to serve our country and gives them the habitability that they deserve rather than being in dank, dark areas stacked three high like chord wood. they now have appropriate living spaces because of the internal capacity of the ship allows us to expand out and a smaller crew gives us more room and better ability to take care of them. so i'm a big fan of the national security cutter. you're right, sir, it's been my number one priority since i've become commandant. the capital investment plan should be up here. if it's not i really can't talk about the next year's budget,

but what i would say is last year i was answering questions to you why national security cutter number seven was not in the f.y. 2014 budget as exhibited in the five-year plan. >> the program of record has not changed then has it? >> it has not ced, no sir. >> so are you telling this subcommittee that we should feel optimistic and comfortable about the eighth cutter? >> yes, sir. i need to make a correction. it's the construction -- long lead money for number seven. you said long lead -- that was put in the f.y. 2013 budget so we have that already. we got the construction money for number seven in the 2014 budget that's before the congress right now. >> true. it was actually the long lead for the eighth that caused me concern because i don't see it there. >> yes, sir. and you're exactly right. it's not there. it's -- no one's more disappointed than i am, but with the current fiscal constraints, i was confronted with a lot of very tough

decisions to make and we have other acquisition projects that needed to be sustained at least at minimum levels as well. and that's why the long lead money is not in there. >> well, you made a very strong and clear statement about the value of this program, and i appreciate it. also appreciate your assurance that we can feel relatively comfortable about getting the eighth. let me just pivot real quickly then. ms. sullivan, to the weather satellite issue. would you like to comment about that? particularly the significant overrun in original cost estimates resulting in shrinking of other program budgets within noaa, including many that are important to my state of mississippi and to senator rubio's state of florida, how would noaa's f.y.

rein in et request costs to this satellite acquisition? and will noaa strive to ensure that the weather satellite does not negatively impact other core missions? >> good morning, senator wicker. it's good to appear before you. the short answer to your question, sir, we have been working terribly hard over the last two years to be sure that we get the jpss program, which is the successor to the fatally flawed program. that program, as you'll recall, was dismantled in 2009. it exists no more. the jpss program we have today is a far cry from that fatally flawed program. it has been hitting its schedule and its budget targets on the j-1 satellite missions quite regularly for the last 12 months. we see an increasing confirmtory evidence in that, as does the g.a.o., that we

have a well-managed program that's gaining its stride. >> why was it fatally flawed? >> there was a very convoluted management construct and fatally flawed early estimates over the optimistic estimates of scope and budget that then failed to get sufficient attention and response early on in the program early enough in its lifetime. but the jpss program has now constituted is in sound management hands. our auditors confirmed that. this budget proposes to substantially restructure and refocus the program in response to concerns by this committee and others on the hill as well as seven different independent reviews conducted over the past year that urged a sharp focus on clear requirements focused on this core weather mission. we're doing that with this budget. we've reduced the life cycle cost by over $1 billion. we very much appreciate the concern you raised, senator, about the necessary healthy

balance among and across the different missionaries of noaa. our ocean and coastal missions are just as vital to the country as our satellite and weather missions. we've worked very hard over the last year and in this budget proposal to move that balance to a healthier point and are committed to ensuring that stays true in the future. >> thank you very much. i look forward to working with you on the gulf coast ecosystem restoration council, which is part of the restore act, to make sure that it aligns with state priorities. i look forward to visiting with you again perhaps in my office or your office about that. thank you. >> look forward to that. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> we'll probably have a second round for those that would like to ask additional questions. next on the list is senator klobuchar. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, senator rubio, for holding this hearing. you might not think of coast guard as minnesota but as admiral papp -- he said i do. he mouthed the word like we

were getting married. >> right answer. >> admiral papp and acting administrator sullivan, thank you for being here. duluth, some of the ice breaking issues we have. and other things. so i appreciate the leapt that you've given us there as well as the issue that we have on some of the guide service issues which i'm not going to get into today. today i really wanted to focus on the floods that we're seeing in the red river valley. the national weather service's north central river forecast center is very important for us to pretect the heightened time of the river crest. two weekends ago i went home and it was 70-some degrees in washington and we had a foot of snow. the governor and i and senator franken had to head down to southwestern minnesota where we have a disaster area where we have ice cycles taking down trees and putting out power.

last weekend we got another foot of snow and today we have another half foot of snow in the middle of april. something unheard of. we thought the fargo area was going to be fine. the chances of a flood was low. there's now a 40% chance that this flood will set a new record and a 75% chance it will be at least the second highest on record. and if anyone remembered this was the point where we were so close to losing morehead, minnesota and fargo, which is in north dakota. i was just up there and met with the mayor, the mayor of morehead, to discuss what preparations -- flood preparations. local officials base their flood prediction and planning on predictions that come from the national weather service. i know literally in fargo and moorehead they're adjusting to resources according to how high they anticipate are the water to crest for this unforeseen problem of all this snow. they're well prepared, but,

again, they need this information. my question is in addition to the modeling and predictions the weather service provides, dr. sullivan, how is noaa working with local officials to ensure that they have appropriate resources in place? >> senator, i think you've just quashed any washingtonians complaints about it trying to be spring in washington. >> ok. thank you. >> we are working very closely with state level and local officials in your state. we began biweekly coordination with federal, state and also tribal sand local officials, including cross-border into canada, back in february. we've been holding at least weekly briefings. more often if they requested since last month. we just briefed both the north dakota and minnesota congressional delegations, including your office, last week. we monitor the snow pack and river conditions very carefully in concert with our u.s. geological survey partners to make sure we are bringing the best and current data possible into those forecast and

prediction models and we're planning to i think we may have moved out now on embedding emergency response specialists in the appropriate locations to be sure that mayors, governors have the timely and focused on their questions, information they need. >> and we know with just ration there may be furloughs, with your personnel. will this affect the emergency efforts that you will -- may have to make coming up in the next few weeks? >> senator, the national weather service and the services we provide to the country through that unit are among the most important obligations that noaa has. the weather service, our satellite control operators, some of our law enforcement personnel, our oil spill response personnel, these are all pock etc. of critical response -- pockets of critical response capability that we know we have to provide a tailered approach as we deal with the realities of sequestration. the plan with which we are now in consultation with our employee units and which we will bring forward in due course to our appropriators for

discussion and approval is one that we have moved through in fact because the impacts per the sequestration law, per se, would have been more severe on the weather service without the adjustments that we are making. we're unhappy about sequester and this harsh and blunt realities that it imposes on us but we're pleased that we've been able to soften the blow on the order of up to -- i emphasize up to -- four days of furlough agencywide. that's part of what has let us take the impact of the you have weather service. that's the tough thing to do but it brings the furlough impact down to a level that managers throughout the agency commonly deal with in dealing with employee illness or vacation levels. and in those critical areas that i cited, we will make sure that we provide our managers with the flexibility needed to adapt to emerging situations, urgent situations. >> so you have that flexibility to put extra people on the ground, if necessary, in the

fargo and moorehead -- >> we make sure we have people so it goes uninterrupted to the american people. >> thank you. i know folks at the river center provide important data that the national weather service uses in dealing with forecast and guidance. their work is especially crucial. could you tell me about how this process works and how the ta is gathered through hydrologic remote sensing? we're not worried about this one area, which is incredibly difficult right now, fargo-moorehead, but also into the rivers in minnesota. >> senator, let me give you a brief answer and i'll follow up with a longer discussion, if you want, in your office. there are input data services from snow pack surveys, some of which are done by instrumentation, some of which are done by measurements made

from noaa aircraft. the geological survey, our sister agency, has the primary responsibility for operating stream gauge networks that provide critical information to the models. those data are relayed to the data insights most notely to overhead satellites. so we scaffang data. we make measurements on the ground and we make field campaigns all of which go into informing both the physics in the models for the hydrological prediction and then the actual status at the vimplete at the moment that provides accuracy to the immediate forecast such as the ones we're giving to your constituents right now. >> is it true that this warm-up rate matters how quickly the ice and snow melt? we are afraid we have a feet of snow in minnesota and then we'll have an 80-degree day and we'll never see anything like

this, especially because of the temperatures at night? >> the timing of snow melt and the speed of melt through the spring season matter critically for the downstream basins, yes, ma'am. >> thank you. i appreciate your work. appreciate that you'll devote personnel -- hopefully we can get a deal here going. i want to thank you for the work you're done. admiral papp, you're off the hook. i'll put questions on the record about dredging and if we need your help up there, the coast guard comes to the rivers and we're in trouble, that's what i think. so thank you very much. >> thank you very much, senator klobuchar. let me go through my questions and if folks have additional ones, we'll allow that after this. for admiral papp, let me know. i know in the capital investment plan i did look at it and you did have for the icebreakers, you have about $2 million. i'm a little nervous, to be very frank with you. i know you've had to battle to

get dollars into the system just to start the process. can you tell me in your words where do you see that program going? as you know, you just heard even in the minnesota region, icebreaker needs. but really in alaska, what will be necessary to manage and alleviate potential risk as we know two years ago, little less than two years ago, the work you all did to help us with noem, alaska, receiving incredible fuel which was critical for their survival through the winter, tell us how you see that plan. give me your thoughts on what you're thinking in the long term on it? good where we're at. the first was to get the operating funds for the icebreakers back in the coast guard budget. that has been accomplished. we have the operating funds now. second was to get a heavy

icebreaker back in service. we selected the polar star -- to polar star had get some experience there are mmer and it's we'll bring it to the arctic for the national science foundation. >> what do you think -- what was the cost on that polar star to get -- i know renovations and so forth, do you remember roughly what that was? >> it was in the vicinity of $65 million. >> how long will you be able to see the life span of that? >> we have the operate really funds back in the budget now for polar star. so that will help us. our plan is to keep polar star sustained for at least 10 years. >> ok. >> until we get a new polar icebreaker.

so keep it running because she was the icebreaker we had. get polar star reactivated and then start the process for a new icebreaker which i thought was going to be the most difficult thing to do. the president put the money in to start this process in the 2013 budget. now, i realize it causes some concern when people look at $2 million in the 2014 budget. that's simply because the 2013 budget was enacted halfway through the year. we have not had a chance to spend any of that money. as a good steward we said we could extend some of that money into the f.y. 2014 spending along with the $2 million to keep this process going. and right now what we're doing is a very thoughtful, deliberate are a tif process to make sure we reach out not only to the department of defense but the national science foundation, noaa and other agencies because this is not just a coast guard icebreaker, it's a united states icebreaker. we need to make sure we take into account all of the requirements that are going to be important to this very significant investment. >> very good.

let me follow-up. as you know about a month and a half ago we had a hearing, about two months ago, in alaska that i conducted regarding the berg sea and the amount of -- the bering sea and the amount of traffic. they do a great job. i give them a lot of extra credit points. not only do they do it on the ground but when they're stuck in front of the committee they do a good job in presenting the risk that is growing. and the risk in regards to the amount of traffic moving through there and not really knowing a lot about it. in case of foreign vessels and some of the work that needs to be done there. do you share that same level -- obviously when you're on the ground in the district you watch it, do you share that same concern that we got to start opening our eyes on bering oing on in the sea in terms of the cargo or

the structure of those ships? >> absolutely, mr. chairman. yeah, it's almost a funny situation. when i am up here with the chief of naval operations he generally puts up a chart of the world and shows the significant choke points in the world. >> except bering sea. >> except for the bering strait. he's put a symbol on the bering strait. while drilling poses some challenges, really my biggest concern is the increase of traffic through the bering strait. and russia is firmly intent on opening up that north sea route as a major route for commerce. we've seen a four-fold increase in traffic going through the bering strait and the potential for disaster, pollution disaster is really i think more likely from ships colliding or a ship running aground, being caught in a storm and becoming disabled, that's the thing i think i worry about the most. good thing is we've -- we, because of the coast guard and

our nature and the way we're able to operate, we represent the united states at the international maritime organization. we're involved with the russians in the north pacific coast guard forum. we work for traffic schemes for the bering strait that i think will improve security in the years to come as that route becomes vital to the entire world. so -- > very good. i am a big proponent of making sure at some point we have some access, maybe a deep water port in the arctic region. i say region because it's a large area compared to the lower 48 and some of the regions of coastal areas. and we have have inquiries from i know port clarence in trying to resolve some issues here. it seems like district 17 is very interested in transferring some land there, but it's held

up here somewhere in the national level here in d.c. would you -- i don't know if you know how much you know about this issue. i want to put it on your radar screen. would you be able to give a commitment or the willingness to have the bering strait corporation come in and try to negotiate this resolution to this issue to the betterment -- obviously to the long-term issue of a deepwater port but also to the needs of the coast guard will need in projecting out 10, 15, 20 years from now? >> yes, sir. two things if i might. first of all, we have i think we're going to be the first federal agency, first service to have an arctic strategy. i'm very proud of this. it's on secretary napolitano's desk right now. >> right. >> i think it's only right that the coast guard take point on this in order to start a strategy that can build into a national strategy. and a deepwater port is a part of that. we recognize it. it's difficult for us to have to go all the way to dutch

harbor to refuel our ships. we would clearly prefer to have something closer to where the action is going to be. in terms of port clearance, that's a new issue for me. the specific issue. i'm aware of the broader structure of divesting ourselves of all of the sea property that we have throughout alaska and other places. >> these are one of those. >> we'll commit to meeting with your constituents. >> fantastic. >> clearly i think there are mutual things that i think we need to talk about because we don't know what our long-range plans on the ter restial side are either. >> thank you. i want to end on this. if we can do anything we can help, we'll be happy to participate. i think they clearly understand that there is an obligation to the coast guard to make sure what your long-term -- and when i say long term, i mean your long-term region, not just one, two years, but many, many years to come, because that's critical to have the infrastructure there. let me turn to senator rubio. >> i just had one question and

that was for dr. sullivan. i want to ask about the budget proposal that funds about 300 days at seas to support fisheries services. this represents an increase of almost 1,400 days at sea above the fiscal 2013 levels. what can you be sure that the ship time is distributed coordinating to need? what are we doing to balance the days to make sure all of the days are given the attention they think is appropriate? >> senator, in the last year we've been through one unique exercise that will underpin part of that answer and then we have a standing process that we we lie on for that. the one-time exercises where it was very thorough and rigorous reassessment and revalidation of our at-sea observing requirements. this is not our requirement for days at sea but really an exercise to make sure that we broke down to the level of what other parameters we need to

observe, specifically at sea, and in order to fulfill our missions so that we as we go forward and look at ship allocations and potentially alternative technologies that might augment oral replace ship assets we can really trace from the specificics observation that needs to be made to whatever mixture of ways to make it. maybe available to us and provide the best balanced approach to fulfilling those needs. that's called -- we've called that our fleet composition plan. it's been buttoned up in the last couple of weeks. we look forward to discuss that with you in the months ahead. that will be one underpinning. secondly, we have a fleet allocation and planning process that is headed by the head of complete rps with a and participation with the mission and science managers. it is in that form that we trace the available ship capabilities, the equipment of the vessels by priority by

priority. >> admiral, i had a question. i don't mean to inject you in another controversial issue, but -- >> what the heck? >> what the heck, we're here anyway. border security, particularly the southern border. as many of us who live in areas where there's water understand, and particularly the entire coastal region is potentially a border sector and it's obviously a little more difficult because there's difficulties crossing that. we've seen that in. in south florida, the cottage industry we've seen of migrant smugglers that were going into cuba and bringing people back on fast boats and even now from time to time it's not rare to hear a story of a raft washing up. very dangerous mission and we should discourage it. what are -- any trends in those migration patterns that we've seen and more importantly, just want to understand what our capabilities are given fact -- let me back up. those migration patterns have spiked in the past as a result

of instability in haiti or the dominican republic, the example of cuba, and in other places, what the risks realistically of a future migration spike if for example the southern border is secured and it becomes a less viable entry point? or if there is some sort of upheaval in the caribbean sector that could lead to a way point for people to come through there. what's your view on our capacity to move there given the budget constraints? >> i think we have adequate capacity ry now, senator. i think what the coast guard does, we have a deterrent value. one of the reasons you haven't seen -- and i was out there during the mid 1990's for the haitian mass migrations and for the cuban mass migration that occurred at the same time. it's a terrible business to have to do. and we need to persuade people to stay in their lands so they don't try to take that dangerous voyage to try and reach the united states.

we do -- our numbers have trendly fairly stable and we haven't seen a spike in a long time. part of it is because they're still recovering from the earthquake and they don't have the wherewithal. part of it is the economy. improving economy in the united states tends to attract people as well. we just haven't seen that, but monitor those flms -- numbers. we have -- the thing that troubles me the most is the smugglers who do this for profit, who are taking creative routes either up through the bahamas, we're seeing haitians being run through puerto rico right now. so it's a constant battle as the smugglers get smarter and daring. they are smaller than the land border. >> the smuggler industry, for lack of a better term, is that on the increase, is that on the decrease? what's the trend? it's an recollection spencive undertaking. my understanding is they charge thousands of dollars per person they bring.

is that something we've seen an increase in or decrease and if we've seen a decrease, is it because of economic factors? how do we stop these? it sounds like a fast boat through the middle of the caribbean is not something we would necessarily stop. >> i think flow of migrants, it's similar to the flow of drugs. people are very creative. yes, we've seen an increase in those people doing it for profit. it's expensive for the poor people that they lure to transport them and it's also a dangerous business. as the southwest border constricts and gets a little bit more secure, there is a tendency, for lack of balloon, if you squeeze something and it will find another direction to go in. i'm increasingly concerned about the southwest border on the california side. right now we're seeing an increase of drug smuggling going around the border trying to get into california. we've seen some migrants coming

that route. we haven't seen a commensurate rise on the gulf of mexico side between texas and mexico, but i think that's another natural place to start looking for. >> thank you very much. , let me o to senator ask a couple questions, admiral. i think you answered this a little bit in your opening and that was in some of the question you received about 100 million dollars for -- in the sandy component. and if i remember in the supplemental to mitigated expected gap in the polar satellite, so forth. how are you using that? has that become valuable in the sense of getting things on track? just give me a sense and then i have a couple more. >> the $111 million supplemental -- and let me

express thanks to both chambers for that appropriation -- was focused on not presenting a gap in the satellite consellation but should there be one on identifying actions that could be taken to mitt gat the degradation of forecast and accuracy and reliability. we commissioned an external study to the private sector, really called for best ideas, assess those. they brought forward a set of recommendations to us that boiled down to six prongs. one is there are a couple of sources of data that are not currently used because of technical problems either with the data source or computing limitations. look at using those. there are some kinds of data we currently purchase, aircraft base datesa is one great example. we buy certain segments of the data there. there are other coverage patterns we could look at. run a sensitivity study. see which might be of greatest value of sustaining the

forecast. improvements in how we take the data in, process called data assimilation, which boils down to being sure that you're using the right data, using it well and getting a handle on the errors that are necessarily in any line of data. some future sources of data that we should pay attention to and consider using, leveraging models that other entities run. in particular, the european center for mid range weather forecasting their techniques to blend outputs of models. we do some of that now. be more ambitious. underpinning all of what we proposed to do in response to this with the funds provided in the sandy supplemental are two things. some of what this independent study brought forward are ideas we're well familiar with but have not been able to take aboard and do because of limitations in our operational supercomputer capacity. the investments we proposed in the sandy supplemental coupled by proposals in this budget put us on a track to make a four-fold increase in the supercomputers by 2014. this will let us move back to

par on data simulation and model capability with the leading outfits in the world and accelerate the transition of these critical research capabilities into prafplgtse >> very good. thank you. i would only pitch because you said -- it jogged my memory as you deal with supercomputers, we have a beautiful one in fairbanks, alaska. i'll leave that as a thought for you. this is an issue. we talked about before with some of your folks within your agency, and this is the monitoring of ground fish in alaska but really around the country and how to use electronic monitoring. i'm going to be banging on your head forever on this because for all the things you just said about satellite technology, computer, supercomputer, all of the technology utilized to critically determine weather patterns and other things, the system we use today is a system for counting fish. it's changed a little bit, but

it's people. and electronic monitoring -- i know the excuse it's not accurate. canada use it. it seems logical that we should be trying somewhere instead of getting more personnel to put onto operations or on ships that may not have the capacity to do it, where electronic monitoring seems logical. i've seen not only in alaska but actually in senator collins' state, meeting with some of the folks there and the technology being developed is impressive. i know the habit of the federal government is study things to death. and i get it. the best study is, get it out in the water. sooner than later. and large volume. because if i look at massachusetts, i can tell you their assessments have significant problems, as you know, because the length of time between assessments is creating huge gaps in their fishing capacity and

understanding their fisheries. we do them every year. we have dollars attached to them. we put in a lot of money. but it would just seem that we -- it seems like every three months i have this conversation with someone from noaa or fisheries sitting where you are and you're the top dog in this. so i'm looking to you to say, let's get on with the show and let's use the technology. and i know what everyone's going to say. i can write the script. well, we're not sure how accurate it is. i tell you now if i go to massachusetts it's not working out so well how they're doing their system, the last two decades have been operational and certain fisheries we have. i want you to accelerate this. even if it means we'll pick one or two areas to do a high concentration of testing on this technology versus humans doing the testing in the sense of assessments, we know canada's been doing it and i

know there are differences. i get that. it seems in this world we can put a thing on mars and watch us kick up dirt and know exactly what's there and find out there was actually water at one time, it just seems we can do this. i would challenge you to accelerate this as an opportunity for cost savings but also engaging the technology of this country onto something i think is desperate for a food supply that needs to have more accurate assessments. i don't mean to get on a rant. i get frustrated. i'm afraid -- i am going to see a fisherman today. i am not sure i want to because i am afraid what they'll ask me. >> senator, we hear your concerns. e share your interests in the we're familiar with the work that's being done in canada, the use that's being made there. my assistant secretary for conservation and management and our director of the fishery and

service have been up to see the archipelago corporation. to make sure we're familiar with the best gear out there. we launched pilot studies in your home state's waters this past year. this you budget includes $2.5 million to keep that on track and moving forward. we share your interest. we understand clearly the concerns and the interests that this represents for your constituents. and i promise you we will stay on top of it. >> accelerate opportunity. let me turn to the other senators. >> thank you. thanks for referencing the finishing industry and the great -- the fishing industry and massachusetts in your commentary. thank you for conducting this hearing. i have a more lengthy statement that i'll put on the record but for the same of -- sake of time, dr. sullivan, a few questions for you. as you heard the chairman mentioned challenges and concerns we have in the commonwealth, which i trust you know well, i'll preference my question with this. because i just want to be candid with you.

right now there is not a great deal of faith and trust in the commonwealth about the decisions and the actions of noaa. there are many in the fishing industry who believe that noaa doesn't care about the fishing industry in massachusetts and they're content to see that fishing industry go away. i trust you understand i'm not one of those people. the fishing industry is 300 years strong in massachusetts and it needs to be there for the next 300 years. as i look at your budget, the fundamental -- the primary question that comes to mind, how does this budget, how does this budget proposal for 2014 support, aid the finishing industry and the great commonwealth of massachusetts? to that end, if you can also address in light of the fact that just last year acting secretary blank issued a declaration of emergency for the fishing industry and we're still waiting for funding swirkse there not funding proposed in this budget to address the emergency? >> thank you, senator. let me assure you, i'm with you on not wanting to see new england fishries and

massachusetts fishries disappear from the earth either and i assure you, no one in the fishery service is aiming in that direction. it's a very tough situation in new england with both depleted stocks and apparently changing climate conditions. our new england regional director has been in the towns and on the docks every day since he came aboard, working with your constituents and your fishermen, trying to aemploy very degree of -- employ every degree of efficiency we have. this budget proposes modest increases but significant increases that will go a long way to improving our stock aelse isment survey and monitoring work. those will be prioritized toward the highest value, most critical economic species of which new england fisheries will certainly be some. it includes additional investments, $21 million in ship time, so we can be at sea and collect the data that are needed to improve the science that underpins the management actions that we're charged with

taking. and importantly and we're very pleased it includes a $10 million request for research into the interaction and consequences of changing climate conditions, both fish docks and prey availability. >> as for the question about the emergency disaster relief funding, was there a particular reason or rationale that is not proposed in this budget, when we've been -- when it's been clear, at least certainly from our side of the table, meaning in the commonwealth of new england, that there is a need and nombings a -- noaa has expressed at least the claim that they appreciate the need. i'm curious why you would not seize this opportunity to put it in there when that need is increasing by the day? particularly since the fishing industry in massachusetts, our stock, we're facing a 77% cut next week. we've got a problem. what is n noaaa's proposed solution? >> we did as you know, lean forward and actively and preeveryonetively issue a

disaster declaration for the new england fisheries, for just that reason. there is not a fund where normally a request for the administration. the deck la plationsmead -- the declaration ma s made by the executive branch. >> these aren't normal times, you dry? >> there are challenge -- they are challenging times. >> so let me ask you this. some of your colleagues from the north testified before this committee very recently and i sent them a letter, posing some of these questions, dr. sullivan, and ask foring for a written response by april 15, which was eight days ago. are you familiar with that letter? >> i am not familiar with that letter, senator. >> ok. i'm still waiting for a written response and i'm wondering, since this is your agency, you're in charge of this agency, the top dog, as the chairman referenced, is there any particular reason why, if you know at this time why noaa decided not to respond to the

senator's written request for information? >> i don't know the answer to that but i will surely look into it at the end of this hear. >> can i have your word that i'll get a response by the close of this week? esponses places my r need to doing to. >> i bet you get an answer today. [laughter] >> i was going to give you the end of the week. >> you're new. >> i would appreciate your follow-up on that. and frankly i would appreciate your commitment that noaa will continue to work hard to help find a solution to what ails the finishing industry -- fishing industry in massachusetts. there is some trust in a needs to be rebuilt there and noaa needs to attend to that posthaste. >> we recognize that and we will work on it. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. senator nelson. >> mr. chairman. admiral. senator adams, secretary. admiral, if we had another v.p. spill -- b.p. spill today,

who's in charge? >> the coast guard is in charge. for response to the spill, sir. >> does that mean you? >> yes, sir. >> you would be the authority? >> it's certainly my responsibility. i may assign people who might be the primary response person, whether it's the district commander or an area -- ncident commander. >> what happened after the b.p. spill, that it was described to the the coast guard that 51% guard is in charge and b.p. is in charge 49%? >> i've heard various quotes like that and i don't know who to attribute them to specifically.

i think when people are being interviewed either in hearings or in press conferences and other things, one of the things that the coast guard does traditionally in order to be prepared for incident responses is to partner both with the federal, state and local agencies and from time to time industry because industry will have to pay for and come up with the ultimate solution. we bear the responsibility to direct industry. so as far as i'm concerned, it's 100% the sponlt of the coast guard. shared with other federal agencies along the way, depending upon the regulations or what particular impacts there are for the incident. the companies accountable for the cleanup. if they don't have the where with all, we -- the coast guard will take point on this. >> in your mind, as the head of

the coast guard, was there a lesson learned from the b.p. spill with regard to who is in charge? >> i think that it's more the way we talk about it. and once again, in order to be prepared and the way the oil pollution act of 1990 was constructed, it puts the coast guard response -- responsible for the cleanup, it puts us responsible for response plans and holding people accountable to get the cleanups done and for many years we worked in partnership with countries, build it's the oil spill response companies, the petroleum companies, the shipping companies. in order to move forward and come up with safe designs, safe practices, we need to work in partnership. so i think unfortunately that is within our event ac lar and that's the which -- ver -- vernacular and that's the way

we talk about it from time to time. i know people were put off by the fact that we talked about our partners in industry. we clearly know and we have learned a lesson that we are in charge, we hold people accountable for cleanup and that i think is one of the many lessons we learned from that. >> well, i would respectfully suggest to you that on the basis of your response, that the administration and i'm not just speaking of the coast ard, has not learned the lessons. because on a daily, unfolding disaster of the magnitude that s the b.p. disaster, the arrangement that was occurring, where there was so much

eference to the oil company, it led to the oil company basically being in charge. d with a delay over and over of getting our arms around the problem. and i'll just give you an example. you remember that the oil ompany wanted us to think that there were less than 1,000 barrels a day that were gushing from the well. this was not until committee and the environment committee of the senate insisted otherwise that we get the actual video, the livestreaming video of what was occurring 5,000 feet below the surface, that then scientists

could calculate the flow rate and see that it wasn't 1,000 barrels a day and each of those were revised upwards by b.p., trying to keep the minimum and ultimately it was close to 50,000 barrels a day. and a lot of mistakes that were made like that, mistakes that have been made with comments coming out of the white house that there is no oil left after e well was capped, i think beg for a changed command structure. one that is a military command structure in an unfolding disaster of the proportions that occurred there. and i simply share this with

you, admiral, the admirable -- that from your comments it doesn't sound like that is being instituted an understood. -- and understood. madam secretary, let me ask you, as a result of this we now found oil onshore, not only the natural gas but the onshore oil that is producing all kinds of new reserves, to what degree is that true and, number two, does that in any way lessen the pressure to drill offshore because of the new oil reserves onshore? >> senator, i'll really not con vernt with the recent estimates for either onshore or offshore oil. that's more in the domain of our colleagues over at the

offshore energy group, at the department of interior. we'd be happy to follow up with your staff on those particulars if you'd like but i don't have figures at hand. >> ok. admiral, let me ask you about the budget. the fact that last year on the maritime oil spill program we had a budget of $238 million , let's year it is down say last year's level it was $289 million and this year it's at $238 million. are we prepared for the next deepwater horizon spill with hat kind of funding? >> sir, the specific specifics of the -- the specifics of the amount in the budget, i'm not at that level of detail, to be able to respond what in fact

that does for us. we've had reductions across the board in the coast guard so it does not surprise me to see something that's about a quarter of a million dollars being reduced to some extent while we're reducing expenditures for building ships, aircraft, boats and losing people at the same time. so, while i can't explain the difference in what's probably about 10ds million or $20 million in that particular line item, what i can say is that we are working very closely with the department of interior, the department of interior is the one that permits drilling. and we've learned a lot through the deepwater horizon process. they will evaluate, we'll work with the department of interior to look at response plans for the companies and the safety of the drilling evolutions and those lessons are the things that we're carrying forward. >> ok. mr. chairman, last year's level

was $289 million. for the oil spill response, it's a part of the coast guard budget. and they are proposing to fund $238 $289 million to million. this committee deserves an answer as to whether or not in was hat's enough and why cut, in light of the fact that we could face another deepwater horizon oil spill? >> senator nelson, let me if i can, i just have some information i'm looking at quickly here. correct me if i'm wrong here but also it begs the question senator nelson is asking, 2012 you had about $213 million, give or take.

now 2013, $289 million and then 2014, $238 million. so you kind of went like this. i think it does beg the question, first off, it's more than $12 million which is good, less than 2013, which is bad, i think we would say, and that gap, the question i think senator nelson and i think i would agree with and that is is the separational impact of that and the spill of the magnitude equal or greater than what occurred in the gulf when you have that kind of differential occur over one year over the next? i think that's an important question because if we're lowering the funding in anticipation of not a catastrophic, which of course we would never want, does that create a problem operationally for you? as are you moving forward in dealing with the oil spill that could happen in the gulf. that gap is a sizable amount. it's almost 15% of your budget. of that unit.

>> mr. chairman, anything i give you right now is pure speculation. there are so many ups and downs in this budget. inconsistencies in the budget as we face these reductions, making tough decisions based upon the limited funds available and also the fact that the 2013 budget was enacted six months into the fiscal year. many times we made judgments, ok, we're going to have to carry over money or there was money that we'll not be able to to spend or we'll transfer things around and that feakts the levels we asked for in 2014 as well. rather than sit here and speculate, what i'd rather do is give you an answer for the record which you deserve. >> i think that would be appropriate. and then maybe could you draw it back a year to that 2012, kind of starting there, so we understand this longer focus. if there was that carryover or whatever occurred, i think the detail would be helpful for both senator nelson and my he -- and myself as well as others who may be interested in this. >> mr. chairman, may we expect the answer to that by the end of the week?

>> you're giving me a lot of extra time. i would expect at the end of the day. >> a question like that we can have by the end of the day. >> fantastic. >> how's that? >> we should ask for week all the time and their response is the end of the day. thank you very much. senator nelson, does that satisfy the request? fantastic. i have some questions for the record but if i could do two quick ones. admiral, and then actually two, one is i know you have made a big effort in regards to housing for your men and women of the coast guard which i give you huge credit for because i have seep some of that housing and -- seen some that have housing and you actually had to live in it at times and i know that. and there's a great need there. i notice there is no or limited funding for 2014 for housing. is that one that has impact and

it's one of those things you said you have to push off because of budget issues, besides more money, is this still in your priority list, understanding money, putting money aside, is this a pretty important thing that you believe we should be focused on also along with you? >> absolutely. and i think you know, having been in alaska with me and linda, it's been a really, one of our highest priorities for our families is to improve housing. we're really grateful that the congress gave us $10 million in the f.y. 2013 budget. and i'm really happy to report to you that that's going to construct extra homes in dode yak where we have the highest -- kodiak where we have the highest need. it's going to construct about 10 homes. out of the 20 that we need to construct. and i'd like to be able to construct more and we've got other places where we need it as well. it's a continuing issue for me in terms of the 2014 budget. it was a reasoned response faced with the fiscal realities

of this year. and also the work load of my people. the congress gave us in excess of $250 million for storm repairs, for hurricane sandy. that work and getting that executed is a huge work load for our civil engineers and our contracting people. so we'll be fully engaged with trying to get ourselves reconstructed and it was just a reasonable decision to make to defer housing in this particular year because that have other money that needs to be spent. >> i might have mentioned this to you once before in housing, i can't remember our final response or if we just had more of a discussion and that is that i know the military's done some successful onbase housing partnerships with the private sector. who went in there with capital dollars and designed long-term. maybe 50-year contracts. i may be wrong about the term. and then operate them so the quality of housing, dramatically on some of the military bases in alaska, the quality of housing is dramatically changed.

they're more winter-prone type of housing and they're also a lot more designed for a family of today versus a family of 50 years ago. is that something the coast guard would be -- would entertain? or are you limited by legislation that you can't even really go down that path as they have done with the military bases? >> actually, three issues there. first of all, public-private ventures for housing is a good thing. the department is deeply invested in it but they have ass, they have huge units. elmendorf, richardson being one of them. >> hundreds. >> and the reality is we get to leverage that. we have coast guard people that are living at elmendorf in beautiful housing that they enjoy, same thing happens in hawaii, where the department of defense is heavily invested, public-private ventures. and numerous other locations around the country. i have many people on my staff and head quarts that are live down at fort bell four in

public-private housing. i myself live in public-private housing. on the air force base here in town. so, i'm a big believer in it. the challenge however for the coast guard is, first of all, our housing areas are generally very small. it doesn't make it economically feasible for our company to come in and make an investment for something so small. and then just the really practical point is that because of the way the laws are written right now, you have to up front score money in advance, huge levels of money that we would not be able to absorb within our budget. >> this is the c.b.o. classic. >> yes, sir. >> yeah. which makes no sense. you don't have to say. that i can say that. i think sometimes -- i'll just eave it at that. forgot about that aspect.

that's something we should work on on then. i'll have a question and give it for the record, in regards ac-144's that right now you don't have funding. you had interest with the air force on their c-27-j's. i'll submit that for the record. a little more conversation on that, if there's something we can help you. >> it's very important to us, senator. >> i agree. i know there's some effort, maybe we could help on combination of budget units that we're reviewing. i'll send that in. in you could respond to that, that would be great. last thing, again, dr. sullivan, i'll have a couple more for the record. i first want to thank you. i know the delegation came to you from alaska regarding the issues of the environmental impact statement on oil and gas. i would argue and i was hoping senator nelson would stay, yes, we still need to do arctic development in and oil and gas development offshore, if done the right way and i think that's the critical thing that

we all want to do. to length i -- potentially 40 billion or more barrels of oil up there as well as gas. but i notice in the supplemental draft, the definition of drilling programs seems to be limited to the company to be able to drill one well at a time in either theater. there's over 600 leases in that area. and my worry is that between that and the mitigation measures which reduce the timetable they can drill, it really is putting a strangle hold on their ability to be successful in striking in one of the largest oil fields in the country, once hit. and can you give me your assurances that the design of the program is not intended to restrict their capacity from an economic standpoint? because that's the worry they have. one well, x company does one

well, they're done, and a lot of the exploreation is done in multiple, sometimes two or three, especially in the arctic. help me understand that restriction which i think is a pretty tight resfrix. -- restriction. >> senator, my understanding about the draft e.i.s. is it's still a bit incomplete, quite frankly. we will follow up with you on this but my understanding about the supplemental is that it in fact does add some flexibility in terms of how many wells and in which theater or combination of theaters and could there be a floater. but let me get the additional details to you and follow up if i may for the record. >> would you do that? i know the companies have put kind of a pause this season. but obviously our season's work now is the time to kind of resolve a lot of these issues can move into the next season. i appreciate that. again, let me end and just say thank you very much. we've had a good attendance today. members coming in and out and asking i think very important

questions. to both of you. both respectfully to your employees that work for you, your employees do incredible work. every day. and i know sometimes we sit in these meetings and bang on your head a little bit to try to get some answers and you're very responsive. i know sometimes it's frustrating to see sit there and have to take it from us at times but i will tell you, your employees do an exceptional job. i can speak from alaska's experience but also around the country. may there be differences at times and may we have individual incidences at times, i can only say that we have a great work force and you should be proud of both your teams that are out there every day, literally on the water, on the land, and in the air. so, thank you very much for both of you. the record will be open for two weeks for any additional questions for the record. again, thank you both for attending today. this hear something adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> the museum is meant to help the visitor relive the first eight years of the 21st

century. the museum explains the decision making process that i went through as president. and we hope the museum inspires people to serve. want to serve their community or serve their country. in some way. we really didn't want to be a school. tank.ted to be a do and so i don't know if there's a lesson there. do i know that we went in a fferent direction with the component of programs from which programs would emerge. >> watch the dedication ceremony of the george w. bush presidential library and museum from southern methodist university in dallas. live thursday morning at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. c-span 35 radio and c-span.org. and tune in earlier at 6:20 a.m. eastern on c-span for conversation with the former first couple.

>> one of the problems when the judges are appointing the public defenders is then that the public defenders' job is reliant on their approval. their es are judged on efficiency often. how fast do they process cases, how quickly do they get through the docket? so, they're going to want a public defender that goes along and gets along. that does their bidding. and that's a real challenge. and in new orleans, for a long time, the system was also that one public defender was a say -- assigned to one courtroom and the same judge. so they were always arguing before the same judge. and the problem with that is that they were then kind of trading clients in a way. like, ok, you know, my private paying client, you know, if you kind of let me spend a little time and take his case to trial, ok, i'll persuade that this clind to -- client to

plead guilty. there was this tradeoff going like you could cash in your favors. only on some of your clients. and it really made for a very corrupt system down there. >> if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. karen houppert on the right to free representation. sunday at 9:00 on "after words." >> next on c-span, we go live to the house floor. votes on a couple of bills they debated earlier. home rule act and the district columbia treasurer or one of the deputy chief financial officer of the district of columbia may perform the duties in an acting capacity if there is a vacancy in the office. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order, h.r. 1067 by

the yeas and nays and h.r. 1068, yeas and nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1067 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to make revisions in title 36 united states code as necessary to keep the title current and make technical corrections and improvements. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 409, the nays are zero, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the unfinished business is vote on the motion of the the gentleman from virginia, to

suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1068 as amend the on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to enact title 54 united states code national park service and related programs as positive law. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 409, the nays are zero. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the bill is passed. and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, ungin finished is question on agreeing of the speaker's

question of the journal. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- >> mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote -- the yeas are 283rk the nays are 118. -- the yeas are 283, the nays are 118.

the speaker pro tempore: have all members voted? any member wishing to change heir vote? on this vote, the craze are 285, the nays are 118, with one voting present. the journal stands approved. -- the yeas are 285, the nays are 118, with one voting present. the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, be removed as a

co-sponsor for h.r. 1588, the medicare drug savings act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the chair will now entertain one-minute requests. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? without objection. >> i rise to recognize the tireless efforts of the women's fund of miami-dade, a nonprofit organization based in the district i represent. ms. ros-lehtinen: over the last 20 years, this inspiring organization has been committed to creating programs and initiatives through which all girls and women can prosper and

become leaders in our community and throughout the nation. in addition, it's committed to ostering awareness about sexually exploited children through its grantee partner, the christy house, dedicated to helping children and families recover from abuse and bring to justice those who violate them. each year we set aside may 25 -- may 25 as a day when we focus on missing and ex-ploilted children. i thank the women's fund of miami-dade for its work to eradicate the abuse of children and to break the cycle of abuse through prevention and therapy. it is through the actions of compassionate members of our community like the women's fund and christy house that will stop these injustices against the most vulnerable of our society, our children. thank you, mr. speaker, for the

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, at a time when our communities are dealing with the impact of climate change, cuts from the sequester will negatively impact our long-term efforts to combat this challenge. energy conservation is a vital component of reducing carbon emissions, weatherization programs and energy star programs have been instrumental in reducing energy consumption. mr. lujan: energy star helped reduce emissions by the equivalent of 41 million vehicles and cut energy bills by $23 billion. further progress on these programs is at risk because of sequestration.

these programs are essential to redurings dependence on oil and cutting emissions. sadly, my republican colleagues have been reluctant to even debate further action to prevent climate change. that's one more reason we can't afford to sit by and do nothing as sequestration reduces the effectiveness of programs we already have in place that are part of the climate change solution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: despite attempts to fully repeal the so-called affordable care act, this program is doomed to collapse under the weight of its own flawed design. senator max baucus of montana referred to the administration's signature health care law as a looming

train wreck. another promise that was used to force passage of the president's health law was brecken in february when the administration's center for medicare and medicaid services announced it would stop enrolling people with pre-existing conditions due to funding constrains. this week, the house will vote on the help sick americans now act which would extend access to those with pre-existing conditions. it would be funding by eliminating funding for a program identified as rife with mismanagement and abuse. the gradual failure of the affordable care act is inflicting significant pain on families, businesses, and our economy. don't take my word, just listen to the senator from montana. his recent remarks aren't off the mac. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: to address the house for one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker. a matter of reflecting on last week and to speak about some very important homeland security issues, likely i want to thank the outstanding law enforcement, f.b.i., and others who work opped the tragedy of 9/11 as we proceed as members of congress to further investigate how not to have that happen again. but the one point i want to make very clearly that's been said over and over by members beaters of the administration, this should not stop reform. i offer my deepest sympathy to those in west, texas, but we have to have a nexus between chemical plants and those who have those kinds of hazardous materials to provide a security lan and process to avoid the

horrific tragedy that occurred. i will soon be introducing such legislation and i certainly believe that it is our role to intervene and to secure the homeland. i yold back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, april is national autism awareness month. autism affects the lives of two million americans, mr. speaker. it's the fastest growing developmental disability in terms of new cases. in my home state of minnesota one in every 67 children is diagnosed with autism. mr. paulsen: minnesota is also home to great constitutions -- institutions like the holland center and minnesota autism center which serve minnesota families with educational and rehabilitation services for children with autism. minnesota health care professionals are also on the frontlines in the search to discover the cause of the high rit of autism among minnesota's

somaly population. while there's currently no medical detection or cure for autism, this disorder is treatable. early diagnosis and intervention can lead to significantly improved outcomes. i was co-sponsor of the combating autism re-authorization act last congress and we must continue the fight and effort to ensure that those with autism get the attention and care they need. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today i rise to honor the memroif the innocent men, women, and children who perished in 1915 during the armenian genocide. mr. bar seance -- mr. sarbanes: each year the united states has the opportunity to stand on the side of justice and recognize the armenian genocide. it would fortify america's moral standing in the family of nations and send a strong

message to our nato ally, turkey that it must examine the dark chapters of its past and the discriminatory impulses of its present. turkey has repeatedly thwarted efforts by congress and administrations to recognize the armenian genocide by threatening all manner of retaliation should recognition be accorded. i submit we do no favors to turkey by acquiescing in its cynical campaign. as we approach the 100th anniversary of the armenian genocide in 2015, it is time for the united states to formally recognize this tragic chapter in world history and to bring some measure of peace and healing to those of armenian descent. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> this thursday, the city of free month will be one of three

cities -- of fre month will be one of three -- of fremont will be one of three cities recognized for the make a difference competition. it's a competition that occurs on the third saturday of october. fremont has participated in the last 10 years. last year, citizens in the city marties pated in 76 projects across the city to clean up and maybe our community much better. on thursday, fremon residents will be present bd the award on behalf of the city of fremont. fremont will also be awarded $10,000 to benefit the fremon family services center. i am proud of fremont and all the participants in make a difference day for their inspirational work to improve our neighborhood. together, each individual

contribution builds a stronger and more sustainable community for everyone's future. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in favor of protecting our infrastructure, keeping our roads safe, and reducing emissions. there are serious safety, infrastructure and environmental concerns involved with allowing even bigger and heavier tractor trailers on our roadways than are currently aloud. mr. cartwright: trucking accidents cause too many deaths and the 3,373 victims in 2011 alone were disproportionately people who were driving in cars caught in these heavy truck crashes.

these oversized trucks also inflict disproportionate damage on our roads. especially on our national bridge system. they impose a significant cost on the rest of taos pay for these repears, plus allowing larger and heavier trucks would divert freight away from our rails and onto our highways, increasing congestion and emissions at a time when we are working hard to reduce both. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize the extraordinary students, parents, and faculty of cathedral high school in el paso, texas. yesterday, i had the privilege of meeting with manufacture oka need ral's best and brightest, along with their principal,

brother nick gonzalez, and chief justice barajas who leads the advanced studies. mr. o'rourke: this year a record six graduating seniors have been designated gates scholars and three others were finalists for this award that provides scholarships for minority students. overall 9 % of the graduating class of 115 has been accepted to college and 32 seniors will be graduated with a degree from the el paso community college in addition to their diploma. cathedral is representative of our vibrant community in el paso. over 85% of the student body soft hispanic origin with students coming from el paso and southern new mexico. the school's rigorous curriculum emphasizes social justice and community service to graduates are not just model students, they are preparing to become model citizens. i am proud to represent cathedral high school and

expect great things from all the students i had the privilege of meeting yesterday. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. george miller of california for today and for the balance of the week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.

mr. garamendi: thank you, mr. speaker, it's good to be back here for another week of work. we certainly have work to do. out across this nation, there are still a lot of people unemployed and it's time for congress to take this extremely important task and to get it done. we have been talking here on the floor for a long time how we can create jobs in america and make it in america agenda that my colleagues have put forth in the last 2 1/2 years is a bill designed to bring jobs back to the united states. and we need them. an article that appeared in the newspapers this last day or so talked about this. this is paul krugman talking about the long-term unemployment we have here in the united states. he cites that for the last five

years, we have been in a crisis. unemployment remains elevated, with almost 12 million americans out of work. but that's where the real striking and huge numbers is in another category and that's the long-term unemployment. 4.6 million americans have been unemployed for more than six months. and more than three million have been jobless for more than a year. the programs that my democratic colleagues and i have offered over the last 2 1/2 years would have gone directly to that problem. he argues that when you have this long-term unemployment, you create a problem that these men and women are not likely to ever get back into the work force. citing several statistics that are found around the nation. but we can do something about that. and the make it in america agenda is exactly what we ought to be working on.

before i go into the specifics of that agenda, i would like to cover one other issue, and this is seen in a report from the international monetary fund that they just came out with in a report the last couple of days, warning the united states to be very careful about continued reductions in our budget. they argue that the austerity program that the united states has actually been on for the last two years -- now remember immediately after president obama became president, the united states took on a stimulus program, an enormous stimulus program of a little over $700 billion and that actually created the start of the rebirth of the american economy, but only lasted for a year, year and half and we undertook at the

behest at the request of my republican colleagues an austerity budget over the decades beginning in 2011. we will see nearly $2 trillion reduction in federal expenditures in the 10-year period. that is what austerity is all about. and today, if you were trying to get on an airplane somewhere in the united states, you were beginning to see yet one more effect of austerity. and that is the air traffic controllers going on furlough so that one day out of 10, air traffic controllers will not be working, meaning there will be a shortage. some say they should have moved the money around and did it some other way, but that's not the way the austerity program is in the united states and not the way the sequestration law is

written. sequestration is across-the-board cuts, expenditure item by expenditure with little or no authority to shift one lower priority to a higher priority. and today, the air traffic controllers, some were not working, and there was a general slowdown of air traffic in the united states resulting in some of my colleagues not getting to work today to vote on the three bills that we had up here on the floor just a few moments ago. the i.m.f. warns u.s. austerity will slow growth. and this was a warning that was issued to the united states and issued earlier to the united kingdom who have been on a very serious austerity budget for the last three years. the result is that the united kingdom is actually seeing a shrinking in their economy as is most of europe. austerity did not work in europe

as an effort to deal with the downturn of the economy and the great recession and certainly is not working here. we need to create jobs in the united states. and a rational economic strategy would say that when you have a general decline in the economy caused by a lack of consumer spending, then it is time for the government to step in and provide support for the economy. and we can do that in a way that actually is an investment strategy and this is where i would like to take this conversation. instead of talking about austerity and cut, cut, cut at the federal level to deal with the deficit, an issue that we must deal with, but that's a long-term issue that we have to get about, but we have a short-term crisis right now with employment and the lack of demand here in the united states. so, what do we do about it? well, first of all, we end sequestration. give a rational way for the government agencies to address

the $85 billion of cuts that are taking place in the next six months. better yet, to put that off into the future. let those cuts occur in the years four, five, six, seven out in the future, rather than right now and what we ought to be doing is increasing the government expenditure on key investments, like keeping the airplanes in the sky, keeping the men and women who are at my air force base in travis continuing to provide the support that the air force needs and moving men and equipment out of afghanistan. and shifting those budget cuts off to the future. i hope that happens. i have asked my colleagues, and certainly the president has asked for this to happen. we'll see if my colleagues here are ready to do that. so what do we do in the meantime? it's about investments. those kind of federal government

expenditures will create immediate jobs as well as long-term economic growth and there are several. first, education. the most important investment that any economy will make, any society will make is the investment in education. and it's not just k-12, but the higher education system, post -doctorate education as well as the retraining of those long-term unemployed who need to be prepared for the jobs of today and tomorrow, not the jobs of yesterday. so that's the education. the second piece of it is research. it's the foundation upon future economic growth. you need to have a robust research program if you intend for your economy to stay ahead. fortunately, america has had such an agenda for a long time. however, the sequestration cuts,

for example, $45 million out of research at the university of california-davis in just the next six months. that means layoffs. layoffs of technicians and others who are involved in the resevere programs and means that those research efforts will not come to fruition in the near future. and they will be delayed and the benefit will not be seen for some time. and some of this is real jobs right away. some of that research has to deal with biopesticides and these are natural-causing or beganisms that occur in the environment. and research in that area is going to be delayed as a result of sequestration. so delay the sequestration and put it off into future years so we can grow the economy today. the third element of economic

growth is in the area of infrastructure. you have to have infrastructure. and this is about moving americans across our landscape. this is about our ports, our highways, our airports and other critical elements in the transportation infrastructure. we know we are woefully behind on meeting the infrastructure needs. probably eight out of 10 bridges in the united states are deficient. we know that our highways are filled with potholes and don't measure up to the standards we would want, simply for the protection of our automobiles' suspension systems. we know that there is far more to infrastructure than just highways and ports and arptse. for example, the mip river is flooding so what is the stad tuesday of levies? the united states? it's not good. in my district i have 1,200

miles and many of them are insufficient to protect the people who live on the land side of the levys. and sacramento, california, ranks number two after new orleans. we need to that have that levy repaired. the army corps of engineers is taking a $250 million cut in its budget and the projects that it does in maintaining the ports. makes no sense at a time when we know there is severe flooding even this day along the mississippi that we would take 50 million out of the army corps of engineers' budget but that is what is happening with sequestration. i'm going to come back to infrastructure in a few moments. i'm joined by one of my colleagues and i'll rapidly finish with the other two elements in ar program for

building the american economy. the final two elements are manufacturing. you have to make things. i'll come back to talk about that in a few moments. and the final element is you must change. the economy's changing. people have to change with the economy. our education system, our infrastructure, all of these require we are willing to change. ow my colleague from the great state of new york -- ohio. share with us your thoughts on sequestration, jobs and what we can do here in the united states. mr. ryan: i thank the gentleman and in line with what you were talking about on the infrastructure piece, i think it's important that we take a look at what investments need to be made in the country. and we are living, unfortunately, in a narrative in the country where everything that the government invests in

is a waste of money, according to some people here in the united states capitol. no investment that the government could make could possibly be a good one. so, we are forced into a discussion of either you are a -- alist and the government bureaucrats should be c.e.o. of the company or nothing. and what the democrats are trying to articulate is for us to re-establish the formula that led to the great economic expansion here in the united states. we have figured it out. we figured it out. we, in just a few hundred years throughout the industrial revolution, this new country figured out how to make investments, how to protect intellectual property, how to protect private property and how to make investments in certain

things that were going to yield dividends down the line, that were going to help business and workers alike, all at the same time. and that formula was invest into infrastructure, invest into roads, invest into bridges, invest into ports, invest into airports, invest in the research, invest into the space program, invest into military research that eventually would spin out into the world. we had the formula. invest into our work force, public schools, universities, g.i. bill. pretty simple formula. this is not brain surgery we are talking about here, but it works, in this little country that was fairly small and really insignificant at one point, became the industrial powerhouse of the entire world because of that genius of public-private

investment. and of course, the private sector came in and made the investments. of course they did. that's what they do. but our job here is, in some instances, is to get out of the way. and we are all in agreement that of course the government can get in the way and have to streamline government and the tax code needs to be simplified. we can do all that without having to disinvest or eat the seed corn that is the future economy of the united states of america. and while i love to join my friend from california because every time he comes to the floor, he is talking about how do we make investments today that are going to pay us dividends down the line. and when you talk about infrastructure, you're talking about making investments that are going to put for the most part, building trades' workers to work, who make a decent

salary, a good salary, good benefits, good health care, and then they go out -- you have a ad built, painters, iron workers, sheet metal workers, they all got some money in their pocket and go down the street and go to home depot and spend some money there. they buy a house, add a room, put up a pool or send their kids to college and the whole thing keeps going and that's what we are talking about here. mr. garamendi: you're exooktly right. we hear people talk about our founding fathers, saying they wouldn't do it this way. interesting that our first president, george washington, went to alexander hamilton, the

treasury secretary, and asked for a strategy to grow the american economy. alexander hamilton came back with a report three or four months later and laid out half a dozen different elements, in that report that he brought to president washington was the genius of what you just described hsm esaid the federal government should provide for infrastructure investment. didn't call it infrastructure. the federal government should build canals, ports, and roads. also said the federal government should buy american made products to encourage manufacturing in america. so this is not new. your recitation of american history down through the line actually began with our very first president laying out the partnership, the public-private partnership, the federal government playing a key role in those investments that

create economic growth. mr. ryan: right, and if you look comparatively speaking now to what india is doing, china is doing, granted they're developing countries but they're spending a lot of their g.d.p., 7% or % of their g.d.p. on infrastructure projects. we're spending maybe 2%. we're not a developping country but we do have major investments to make in our cities, in our rural areas, whether you're talking about combined sewer system, water lines, whether you're talking about dealing with the septic systems in rural areas, whether you're talking about bridges. i think in my biggest, in the county where i live, i think we have of-something bridges that are deemed not adequate. mr. garamendi: unsafe. mr. ryan: unsafe.

in one county in ohio, when there's 88 counties. and we have high unemployment, much higher than any of us would want. yes, we have problems but the federal government is getting money at 1% and -- my friends, i'm in the budget committee, we talk a lot about deficits and everything else, i know a lot of people would say, you can't borrow our way out of this. and what i'm say, my argument that i'm making, i don't want to attribute anybody else to this, is we've got major billion dollar -- hundreds of billions of dollars, probably society of engineers say a couple trillion dollars infrastructure needs over the next decade or so. why wouldn't we invest into these projects? they say, you've got to borrow the money. we're going to borrow the money at 1%, maybe a little higher, depending on the day of the week. that project that we can do today is going to be a certain

price. $100, say. what's that project going to be like in five or 10 years? it's going to be that much more expensive. labor is going to be more expensive. energy costs are going to be more expensive. raw materials are going to be more expensive. cement is going to be more expensive. steel is going to be more expensive. brick, everything is going to be more expensive. and part of the problem with the treasury is we don't have enough people working, paying taxes into the treasury. o the me -- so to me, we get a two-fer. it's not like the project doesn't need to get done, it's not makework, it's something that needs to get done. mr. garamendi: let me give you an example, the american public works organization, sanitation workers and the like, estimate that 25% of all the fresh treated water in our municipal water system is throst leakage.

and they estimate, together with the e.p.a., that we need to spend over $300 billion immediately to deal with sanitation systems in the united states that are inadequate. and $335 billion in drinking water so we have clean, available drinking water. one more point here. for every billion thrars we spend, you put 28,000 people to work immediately. those are the engineers, the draftsmen, the architects, the men and women that are operating the equipment that are fill the ditches, laying the pipe. and if we use another strategy we've dwond the democratic side called make it in america if you use our taxpayer money to buy american-made equipment, then in your district, the steel mills begin once again to produce american-made steel. and all of the pipe and other equipment that's needed can be produced in america using our

money and i love your example of the 1%. there have been democratic proposals and in fact the president talked about it here at the state of the union, about creating an infrastructure bank. if you take that 10-year or 15-year money that the government can were reat a percent to meab a percent and a half, put it in an infrastructure bank, then loan it to cities and municipalities and others that need to build the systems, say is we borrow at 1.5%, you loan it out at 1.6%, that's enough to pay that back. with ecirculate that money in our economy, we use the money to buy american made products and get this economy moving. it's there for us. we can do this. if only we put our minds to it. set aside for a moment the deficit issue. i said moment, not forever, we know we have to deal with the deficit. but you cannot solve that deficit unless you have

americans working. and we can put americans back to work. -- back to work. >> and unleash, i believe, unleash a new economy. i mean, that's -- we're strangling the economy right now. because we're not making the kind of investments. and again, when you look at our competitors, because from northeast ohio, we play a lot of football, there's a scoreboard. there's a scoreboard. mr. ryan: america is not going to win every game but we better be in a position where in the global economic competition that we are competitive and we know what makes us competitive. and i'm not saying it's all about making money, a lot of this stuff that we're talking about is quality of life. we won't get into health care preventive care or anything leek that but we have human beings that are stuck in

traffic for two hours in a commute in and out of a city and we're not investing in the high speed rail, which would be another job creator, and good for the environment, and a new industry. and it would help develop and spread new technologies. so we are not leading right now. we have status quo. and i hate to say this, but we have a lot of people who want it to be that way. they want the congress to be dysfunctional because they don't necessarily like government. you don't have to be enamored with government but you do have to recognize that there is a role to be played here. and you know if you play port sprtor, you read the newspaper, watch the football team, it's the quarterback, it's the wide receiver, it's the running backs, it's the skill position people who get all the press but none of that works, and let's say that those are people in the private sector, c.e.o.'s that we worship.

well, within that team, there are linemen, there are blockers and tacklers, linebackers and people that are in the guts of the game, on the frontlines. making it happen so that this other stuff can happen. the infrastructure is the blocking and the tackling, it doesn't make the headlines. but it does what needs to be done in order for all of the other stuff to work. mr. garamendi: you reminded me of my college football career at the university of california, berkley -- university of california berkley. i was an offensive forward, blocking and tackling. mr. ryan: so this resonates with you. mr. garamendi: yes. along with bumps an bruises an the like. but this is the role of our government, to make critical investments, critical

investments in education, in research. one of the make it in america agenda items is the extension of the research tax credit and a permanent or at least a long ex-tense of it, representative carney has introduced house resolution 905 that would extend that. we have been extending it one year at a time but that doesn't give the businesses the opportunity to plan on a long extension or long period of time for research. for example, i was at genentech in my district, they have a major biopharmaceutical program there, biggest biopharmaceutical plant in the world and they conduct a lot of research but the start-stop of the research and development tax credit makes it difficult for them to plan long into the future. so this piece of legislation, part of the make it in america agenda, does that extension,

gives certainty to businesses. we also have the infrastructure bank, being reintroduced by our colleagues here on the democratic side. this is one of about two dozen bills that the democrats have introduced for the purposes of moving the economy by bringing the manufacturing back home. we also have the patriot corporations of america act by representative chacouse -- schakowsky from chicago that we -- that rewards companies when they bring the jobs back home. previously and even today, american corporations can take a tax break for shipping jobs offshore. they don't get a tax break when they bring the jobs back home. we want to reverse that. there's a series of bills i call the attention of congress to these bills, the make it in america agenda, so we can once again make it in america. not only make things in america but americans can make it,

infrastructure, critical element of this. >> when you look at manufacturing, which the r&d component leads to partnerships with, you have two problems. one is it's year to year so you can't plant -- mr. ryan: there's two problems. one is it's year to year so you can't plan long-term. the national institutes of health have been inconsistent as well, those are things we need to ramp up. those aren't huge money item bus those yield a lot of value. so extend the r&d tax credit, beef up national science foundation. beef up national institutes of health. beef up the research and the -- in the adopt of energy, public-private partnerships, lay that groundwork for the private sectoring help the private sector. we had a group of c.e.o.'s in last week that were in in the semiconductor industry. they talked about the same thing and they talked about the

public-private partnerships and how that's needed for us to maintain our competitiveness here and these are good paying jobs in upstate new york and other places and these are the kinds of investments we need to make. again, we've got to get out of this mentality that every single thing that the government does is bad, there are some things, and it's a public--- and it's public-private partnerships will lead the way for us. mr. garamendi: george washington and alexander hamilton had it right, american government working with the private sector can make a difference. talking about infrastructure, we have an opportunity this year -- this year, congress and the president, to make a huge impact on american jobs. we are going to rewrite, this session, the surface transportation act for america. now mr. rahall and i have authored an amendment, a bill that we hope becomes part of that surface transportation t,